document_title: DREAM Act

question_text: when was the last time the dream act was introduced

text: DREAM Act

text: Requirements[edit]

text: Beneficiaries of the DREAM Act must meet the following requirements:[3]

text:
They were younger than 18 years old on the date of their initial entry to the United States
Have proof of having arrived in the United States before age 16[4] (Dream Act of 2017, S.1615, Sec.3(b)(1)(B), and HR3440, Sec.3(b)(1)(B)).[5] [6]
Have proof of residence in the United States for at least four consecutive years since their date of arrival
If male, have registered with the Selective Service
Be between the ages of 12 and 35 at the time of bill enactment
Have graduated from an American high school, obtained a GED, or been admitted to an institution of higher education
Be of good moral character[7]

text: During the first six years, qualifying people would be granted "conditional" status and would be required to (a) graduate from a two-year community college or (b) complete at least two years towards a four-year degree or (c) serve two years in the US military. After this six-year period, those who meet at least one of these three conditions would be eligible to apply for permanent resident status. During this six-year conditional period, they would not be eligible for federal higher education grants such as Pell grants but they would be able to apply for student loans and work study.[8]

text: If they have met all of the conditions at the end of the 6-year conditional period, they would be granted permanent residency, which would eventually allow them to become U.S. citizens.[9] It is not known how many of those eligible would go on to complete the further requirements. One organization estimated that only 7,000–13,000 college students nationally can fulfill the further obligations.[10] A different analysis found that over 2 million individuals could benefit under the Act.[11]

text: For conditional resident status[edit]

text: The individual must:

text:
have proof that they entered the United States before the age of 16 and must have continuously lived in the country for at least 5 years
have graduated from a United States high school or obtained a GED in the US.
demonstrate good moral character
pass criminal background checks and reviews

text: After having obtained and held conditional resident status, permanent residency may be granted if the following requirements have been met in a period of six years.

text: For permanent residency[edit]

text: The individual must:

text:
Have attended an institution of higher learning or served in the United States military for at least two years and if discharged, have received an honorable discharge
Pass another series of background checks
Continue to demonstrate good moral character

text: If these requirements are not fulfilled the conditional resident will lose their legal status and be subject to deportation.[12]

text: Background[edit]

text: Members of Congress have introduced several forms of this bill in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Members in the House passed one such bill on December 8, 2010 by a vote of 216–198;[13] Senators debated a version of the DREAM Act on September 21, 2010. A previous version of the bill, S. 2205, which required 60 votes to gain cloture, failed on a 52–44 vote in 2007, eight votes short of overcoming a filibuster by senators opposed to the bill.[14]

text: The United States military faced challenges in enlistment, which in 2005 were described as a "crisis",[15] though the economic downturn of 2007–2010 did away with many of the enlistment challenges. Immigrants without a United States Permanent Resident Card (also known as a green card) are not allowed to enlist. In 2007, several senior officials at the Department of Defense have spoken in favor of promising resident status to members of the military as a means of boosting recruitment.[16]

text: The bill also restores the option for states to determine residency for purposes of higher education benefits by repealing Section 505 of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIRA) of 1996 (8 U.S.C. § 1623.[3] The majority of states interpret this provision as disqualifying illegal immigrant students from certain higher education benefits such as in-state tuition rates.[17] Some states have enacted laws aimed at making illegal state residents eligible for in-state tuition rates without violating this IIRIRA provision.[18] However, some students paying out-of-state tuition have filed lawsuits in these states, claiming state education officials violated this federal law.[19]

text: Legislative history[edit]

text: The original version of the DREAM Act was introduced on April 25, 2001 by Representative Luis Gutiérrez, Democrat from Illinois, as the "Immigrant Children's Educational Advancement and Dropout Prevention Act of 2001" (H.R. 1582) during the 107th Congress. This bill received 34 cosponsors, and would have allowed illegal immigrant students to first apply to be protected from deportation and then apply for and receive lawful permanent residency if they met the criteria.[20]

text: One month later, on May 21, 2001, Gutiérrez's version of the bill was scrapped in favor of a more limited version entitled "Student Adjustment Act of 2001" (H.R. 1918), introduced by Representative Chris Cannon, Republican from Utah. This version of the bill lowered age eligibility to 21 years of age and garnered 62 cosponsors. On August 1, 2001 a mirror bill to the "Student Adjustment Act of 2001" was introduced in the Senate by Senator Orrin Hatch, also a Republican from Utah. This legislation, S. 1291, was the first bill given the short title of "Development, Relief, and Education for Alien Minors Act" or "DREAM Act." Since that time the DREAM Act has been introduced in both the Senate and the House at various times.

text: The text of the bill was placed in various other immigration-related bills, including the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 (S. 2611) and the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2007 (S. 1348). With the failure of these comprehensive reform bills, Senator Richard Durbin, Democrat from Illinois, made its passage a top priority for 2007.[21][22] In September 2007, Durbin filed to place the DREAM Act as an amendment to the 2008 Department of Defense Authorization Bill (S. 2919). In light of the criticism, Durbin tabled the amendment in favor of a rewritten DREAM Act amendment to the Defense Bill. In consideration of their opponents, all language regarding in-state tuition was removed from the amendment and an age cap of 30 was put in place for potential beneficiaries.[23] Military leaders embraced the bill, which included the promise of resident status to members of the military, as a means of boosting recruitment.[24]

text: On October 18, 2007, Durbin, along with Republican co-sponsors Charles Hagel of Nebraska and Richard Lugar of Indiana, introduced the DREAM Act as S. 2205. Though nearly identical to the revised amendment to the Defense Bill, opponents continued to cite previous arguments. To bring the DREAM Act up for debate, a vote was scheduled on October 24 that would require a filibuster-proof count of 60 yes votes, but that failed.[25] Senate opponents cited a variety of reasons for their opposition. Some labeled the DREAM Act as amnesty that would encourage chain migration and further illegal immigration in anticipation of new versions of the DREAM Act. Others stated that the DREAM Act, though worthy legislation, should be enacted only as part of a comprehensive immigration reform.

text: Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, who had previously stated that she would oppose consideration of the DREAM Act, announced on the Senate floor that she had expressed reservations to Durbin and he had made a verbal commitment to work with her to make changes that she saw necessary to garner greater Republican support. In response, Durbin announced that the first amendment that would be considered, should debate of the DREAM Act begin, would completely re-write the bill in favor of the language that Hutchison suggested. According to her suggestions, illegal immigrant students should be allowed to hold a temporary student visa with a renewable work permit instead of conditional permanent residency. Although 52 Senators voted in favor of considering the DREAM Act, this fell eight votes short of breaking filibuster and the legislation was not considered.[23]

text: The act was re-introduced in both chambers of Congress on Thursday, March 26, 2009, during the 111th Congress by Senators Dick Durbin (D-IL), Richard Lugar (R-IN), Harry Reid (D-NV), Mel Martinez (R-FL), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Joseph Lieberman (I-CT), Ted Kennedy (D-MA), and Russ Feingold (D-WI)[26] and U.S. Representative Howard Berman (D-CA). To date, 128 representatives[27] and 39 senators[26] (not including former Senator Edward Kennedy) co-sponsored the bill. Under this version of the DREAM Act, immigrants could qualify in part, by meeting the following requirements:

text:
Be between the ages of 12 and 35 at the time the Law is enacted
Arrived in the United States before the age of 16
Resided continuously in the United States for at least 5 consecutive years since the date of their arrival
Graduated from a US high school or obtained a General Education Diploma
Good moral character

text: In addition to the temporary Residency, illegal immigrant students who qualified would also be entitled to apply for student loans and work study but would not be eligible for Pell grants. In certain circumstances, the person could lose temporary immigration residency if he or she did not meet the educational or military service requirement within the six-year time period or if they committed any crimes (other than those considered non-drug related misdemeanors) regardless of whether or not they had already been approved for permanent status at the end of their six years. If an individual were convicted of a major crime or drug-related infraction, (except for a single offense of possession of 30 g or less of marijuana) they would automatically lose the six-year temporary residence status and be immediately subject to deportation.[28]

text: The 111th Congress continued to consider the DREAM Act bill throughout 2010. S. 3827, a new version of the DREAM Act, includes numerous changes to address concerns raised about the bill. The DREAM Act, along with a repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", was incorporated into the National Defense Authorization Act for the Fiscal Year 2011. On September 21, 2010, the Senate filibuster of the bill was maintained in a 56–43 vote; it would have taken 60 votes to stop the filibuster and continue the progress of the bill.[29] The following day, Durbin introduced the bill once again along with Richard Lugar. Only two senators co-sponsored the bill and it was defeated again.[30]

text: Less than a month later, on November 16, President Barack Obama and top Democrats pledged to introduce the Dream Act into the House by November 29.[31] The House of Representatives passed the DREAM Act on December 8, 2010,[32][33] but the bill failed to reach the 60-vote threshold necessary to end debate on the Senate floor (55-41—Motion to invoke cloture on the motion to concur in the House amendment to the Senate amendment No. 3 to H.R. 5281).[34]

text: On May 11, 2011, then Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid reintroduced the DREAM Act in the Senate. Some Republicans who had supported the bill in the past, including Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, Jon Kyl of Arizona, John McCain of Arizona, and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, withheld their votes, objecting that such a bill should not be granted without increasing immigration enforcement. Reid indicated that he would consider adding a workplace enforcement measure in the DREAM Act that would require every employer to use E-Verify, the government's Internet-based work eligibility verification system.[35] President Obama supported the bill as one of his efforts to reform the US immigration system.[36]

text: In July 2011, the state of California enacted the California DREAM Act, giving undocumented immigrant students access to private college scholarships for state schools.[37] In August, the state of Illinois authorized a privately funded scholarship plan for children of immigrants both documented and undocumented.[38]

text: On June 15, 2012, President Barack Obama announced that his administration would stop deporting undocumented immigrants who match certain criteria included in the proposed DREAM Act.[39] On August 15, 2012, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) began accepting applications under the Obama administration's new Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program. Thousands applied for the new program.[40] Because DACA was designed in large measure to address the immigration status of the same people as the DREAM Act, the two programs are often debated together, with some making little distinction between them and others focusing on the difference between the DREAM Act's legislative approach in contrast to the implementation of DACA through executive action.[41] As of January 2017, 740,000 people have registered through DACA.[42]

text: Projections of economic impact[edit]

text: In a December 2010 report, the federal Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation estimated that the November 30, 2010 version of the DREAM Act would reduce (federal) direct deficits by about $1.4 billion over the 2011–2020 period and increase federal government revenues by $2.3 billion over the next 10 years. Indirect federal costs (about 80% of the federal budget) and state and local tax impacts were not considered.[43] However, the same report also notes that the Act "would increase projected deficits by more than $5 billion in at least one of the four consecutive 10-year periods starting in 2021" (emphasis added). A study conducted by the Center for American Progress estimates that if passed, the DREAM Act would create 1.4 million jobs by 2030, primarily through the expected increase in educational attainment, earnings, and buying power for "DREAMers".[44]

text: Luis Miranda, White House Director of Hispanic Media, has spoken in support of the 2010 version of the DREAM Act.[45] He argues that passage of the Act would make the U.S. more competitive in the global economy by allowing illegal immigrants "to live up to their fullest potential and contribute to the economic growth of our country."[45] Miranda argues that the DREAM Act would not create an "amnesty program" because it requires a "lengthy and rigorous process" to be eligible for benefits, requiring, for example, a criminal background check and proof that the applicant has not committed any crimes that would make him ineligible for residency.[45] Miranda also argues the Act would not encourage more students to immigrate because it only applies to illegal immigrants who are already in the country.[45] Furthermore, the Act would create a waiting period before DREAM Act applicants could sponsor green card applications for their relatives. Miranda also notes that Defense Secretary Robert Gates has stated that the DREAM Act would provide an expanded pool of military recruits.[45]

text: A 2010 study by UCLA's North American Integration and Development Center, an advocacy and research group that focuses on "transnationalism and globalization through action research", conducting "interdisciplinary research concerning the economic integration process between the United States, Mexico and Canada", produced two estimates of the income that would be earned by illegal immigrants who would be potentially eligible for the proposed DREAM Act benefits. The first estimate is based on analysis from a study by the Migration Policy Institute's National Center on Immigrant Integration Policy, an organization seeking to "advance the economic mobility and social inclusion of immigrants in the United States",[46] which estimated that 38% of those eligible for the DREAM Act's benefits would actually obtain legal permanent resident status. In that scenario, the NAIDC estimates that DREAM Act beneficiaries would earn $1.4 trillion over a 40-year period. On the other hand, NAIDC estimates that if all those eligible for DREAM Act benefits successfully met the education or military service requirements and obtained legal resident status, they would earn $3.6 trillion over the same 40-year period. How many dollars they would use of available federal, state and local resources over the 40-year period was not estimated.[47]


document_title: Major League Baseball schedule

question_text: when did baseball go to 162 game schedule

root

text: Major League Baseball schedule

text: Historical season schedules[edit]

text: This account gives the length of the major league "championship season" schedule by league and year. It does not cover the curtailment of play by war (1918) or by strikes and lockouts (1972, 1981, 1994). The schedules for 1995 were revised and shortened from 162 to 144 games, after late resolution of the strike that had begun in 1994 required a delay in the season to accommodate limited spring training.

tag: p

text: The listed years are those in which the league revised its schedule. For example, the National League (NL) scheduled 84 games during 1879, 1880, 1881, and 1882 – that is, four seasons from 1879, ending before 1883, the next listing. 1876 is listed here for convenience although the NL did not schedule games (see 1871 to 1876, below).

text: National League[edit]

text:
Start year

Total Games

Schedule

1876

70

10 games × 7 opponents – matches scheduled by the two clubs (as previously, below)

1877

60

12 games × 5 opponents – the first league schedule

1879

84

12 games × 7 opponents

1883

98

14 games × 7 opponents

1884

112

16 games × 7 opponents

1886

126

18 games × 7 opponents

1888

140

20 games × 7 opponents

1892

154

14 games × 11 opponents

1893

132

12 games × 11 opponents

1898

154

14 games × 11 opponents

1900

140

20 games × 7 opponents

1904

154

22 games × 7 opponents

1919

140

20 games × 7 opponents

1920

154

22 games × 7 opponents

1962

162

18 games × 9 opponents

1969

162

18 games × 5 opponents in-division, 12 × 6 interdivision games (yielding 90 intra- and 72 inter-division games)

1993

162

expansion – 13 games × 6 opponents in-division, 12 × 7 interdivision games (78 intra- and 84 inter-division)

1994

162

leagues split into 3 divisions – schedules based on 1993 alignments

1997

162

inter-league play introduced – opponent schedules vary

1998

162

expansion – opponent schedules vary

2013

162

19 games × 4 opponents within same division (76 games), 6 or 7 games x 10 opponents interdivision within same league (66 games), 20 interleague games[2]

tag: table

text: American League[edit]

text:
Start year

Total Games

Schedule

1901

140

20 games × 7 opponents

1904

154

22 games × 7 opponents

1919

140

20 games × 7 opponents

1920

154

22 games × 7 opponents

1961

162

18 games × 9 opponents

1969

162

18 games × 5 opponents in-division, 12 × 6 interdivision games (yielding 90 intra- and 72 inter-division games)

1977

162

expansion – 15 games × 6 opponents in-division, 10 or 11 × 7 interdivision games (90 intra- and 72 inter-division, as previously)

1979

162

13 games × 6 opponents in-division, 12 × 7 interdivision games (78 intra- and 84 inter-division)

1994

162

leagues split into 3 divisions – schedules based on 1993 alignments

1997

162

inter-league play introduced – opponent schedules vary

1998

162

expansion – opponent schedules vary

2013

162

19 games × 4 opponents within same division (76 games), 6 or 7 games x 10 opponents interdivision within same league (66 games), 20 interleague games[2]

text: American Association[edit]

text: 1882 – 1891

text: Thus the AA expanded its schedule to 140 games two years before the National League did so. After 1891 four AA clubs joined the NL and four were bought out, nominally creating one big league, the "National League and American Association" of 12 clubs.

text: Union Association[edit]

text: Players' League[edit]

text: Federal League[edit]

text: 1914: 1915

text: National Association of Professional Base Ball Players[edit]

text: The National Association of Professional Base Ball Players (1871–1875) did not schedule games, nor did it control the number of teams, a major reason for its demise after the 1875 season. Clubs paid a $10 entry fee, later $20, to enter the Association for one season, and thereby declare for that year's national championship. Without continuing membership or heavy investment, there was little to deter a team from breaking a commitment, and though it happened, it was mainly due to clubs going out of business.

text: The National League organized for 1876 on a different basis, granting exclusive memberships to eight clubs that would continue from year to year — it was generally expected, if only because membership would be profitable. But the new league followed its predecessor in merely agreeing that each club would play a certain number of matches to a decision (excluding ties) by a certain date.  Boston played 70 games with its quota of ten decisions against every rival. The others achieved 56 to 68 decisions, 64 to 66 for the four western teams as the teams from New York and Philadelphia (eastern) abandoned their schedule-concluding road trips.

text: For all six early seasons, prior to the first league schedule in 1877, member clubs scheduled their own matches by mutual arrangement, including championship games necessarily with member clubs, other games with members, and games with non-member clubs. Some may have practically dictated their arrangements with some others, but there was no central control or coordination.

text: This listing gives the greatest number of games played by any club for each season. Naturally, the leader by games played was always a strong club fielding one of the better gate attractions.

text: The leading numbers of games played to a decision were 33, 54, 59, 71, 82, and 70 decisions; by the listed teams except the Mutuals in 1872.

text: Recent season schedules[edit]

text: 1998 to 2012[edit]

text: Since 1998, there have been 30 major league teams with a single advance schedule for every season that comprises 2430 games.  Each team plays 162 games, 81 as the "home" team, 81 as the "visitor". (This is true even on the rare occasion when a game is played at a ballpark not home to either team.)  Occasionally, the advance schedule is subsequently altered due to a game postponement or a one-game tie-breaker to determine which team will play in the postseason.

text: Before 2013 the schedule included 252 "interleague games" that matched one team from the American League and one from the National League; the other 2178 games matched a pair from within one league. About half of the latter matched teams from within one division and about half matched teams from different divisions in one league. In the Central Division of the National League, which alone had six teams, every pair of division rivals played 15 or 16 games. Within the other, smaller divisions every pair of teams played 18 or 19 games.

text: Division games (1091). There are 61 pairs of teams from within one division.

text:
25 pairings will play 19 games each (475 games)
21 pairings will play 18 games each (378 games)
13 pairings will play 16 games each (208 games) – most NL Central pairings
2 pairings will play 15 games each (30 games) – two NL Central pairings
Total: 1091 games.

tag: ul

text: Other intraleague games (1087). There are 150 pairs of teams from two different divisions within one league.

text:
23 pairings will play 10 games each (230 games)
15 pairings will play 9 games each (135 games)
8 pairings will play 8 games each (64 games)
34 pairings will play 7 games each (238 games)
70 pairings will play 6 games each (420 games)
Total: 1087 games.

text: Interleague play[edit]

text: The schedule for interleague play comprised 84 three-game series in each season from 1998 to 2012, divided as six series (18 games) for each of fourteen AL teams and as many as six for each of sixteen NL teams.

text: Among the 224 interleague pairs of teams, 11 played six games every year, which were scheduled in two three-game series "home and home", or one at each home ballpark. Five of these 11 special arrangements matched two teams in the same city or in neighboring cities, where they wholly or partly share territorial rights. Six were regional matches at greater distance, four of which were in the same state.

text:
Baltimore vs. Washington
Chicago Cubs (North Side) vs. Chicago White Sox (South Side)
Cincinnati vs. Cleveland
Miami vs. Tampa Bay (Tampa/St. Petersburg)
Houston vs. Texas (Arlington)
Kansas City vs. St. Louis
Los Angeles Angels vs. Los Angeles Dodgers
Milwaukee vs. Minnesota (Minneapolis/St. Paul)
New York Mets (Queens) vs. New York Yankees (Bronx)
Oakland vs. San Francisco
San Diego and Seattle

text: These special local and regional series accounted for 66 interleague games annually from 1998-2012, and the other 186 games were determined by rotation.

text: 9/11 rescheduling[edit]

text: The 2001 season was suspended for one week due to the September 11 terrorist attacks and resulting disruptions in travel, resulting in games scheduled for September 11–16 being rescheduled to the first week of October and the playoffs and World Series being rescheduled one week later than their originally planned dates, which resulted in the World Series continuing into early November.

text: Schedule changes for 2013, precipitated by realignment that created two equal-sized leagues of 15 teams each, gave every team 20 interleague games.[2] Sixteen of which were determined by a match of divisions, one from each league; all teams in a given division play all teams in a given division from the other league. (Each plays a three-game series against four teams from the designated division and two two-game series against the remaining team.)

text: The matched divisions rotate annually:

text:
AL East vs. NL West (2013), vs. NL Central (2014)
AL Central vs. NL East (2013), vs. NL West (2014)
AL West vs. NL Central (2013), vs. NL East (2014)

text: Each team played its four other interleague games against a designated "natural rival", with two games in each club's city. Thus all 30 teams, rather than 22 of 30 as previously, were deemed to have a natural rival in the other league.  In 2013 the natural rivalry games were all scheduled for May 27 to May 30 (Memorial Day weekend) but in 2014 their scheduled dates range from May to August.

text: Ten of the natural rivalries from 2012 and earlier continued, while the Houston–Texas "Lone Star" rivalry had been transformed into an intra-division one with 19 games played. Five of the special arrangements were new in 2013 , including one each for Houston and Texas.

text:
Baltimore vs. Washington
Boston vs. Philadelphia
New York Mets (Queens) vs. New York Yankees (Bronx)
Miami vs. Tampa Bay (Tampa/St. Petersburg)
Toronto vs. Atlanta
Chicago Cubs (North Side) vs. Chicago White Sox (South Side)
Cincinnati vs. Cleveland
Detroit vs. Pittsburgh
Kansas City vs. St. Louis
Milwaukee vs. Minnesota (Minneapolis/St. Paul)
Houston vs. Colorado
Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim vs. Los Angeles Dodgers
Oakland vs. San Francisco
San Diego vs. Seattle
Texas vs. Arizona

text: For 2014, four (4) of the five (5) new rivalries have been revised (‡), all except Detroit and Pittsburgh.

text:
Baltimore and Washington
Boston vs. Atlanta (until 1952, both teams were based in Fenway–Kenmore)
New York Mets (Queens) vs. New York Yankees (Bronx)
Miami vs. Tampa Bay (Tampa/St. Petersburg)
Toronto vs. Philadelphia
Chicago Cubs (North Side) vs. Chicago White Sox (South Side)
Cincinnati vs. Cleveland
Detroit vs. Pittsburgh
Kansas City vs. St. Louis
Milwaukee vs. Minnesota (Minneapolis/St. Paul)
Houston vs. Arizona
Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim vs. Los Angeles Dodgers
Oakland vs. San Francisco
San Diego vs. Seattle
Texas vs. Colorado

text: Every team now plays 19 games against each of 4 opponents within its division (76 games), and 6 or 7 games against each of 10 opponents from other divisions within its own league (66 games).

text: When corresponding divisions (i.e. NL East vs. AL East) play each other, a slight adjustment was made to the interleague games. Teams now play 6 games against their rival and 4 games (home and home) against two opponents plus one home and one away 3 game series (14 total) against the other four teams in the opposing division.  This was done in 2015, and will next occur in 2018.

text: Under the new collective bargaining agreement reached in December 2016, several changes were done to the scheduling pattern for the 2018 season. The overall length of the season has been extended to 187 days with the addition of four off-days for all teams. All teams will play on Opening Day, which for 2018 will be held on March 29. Sunday Night Baseball will no longer be played on the final Sunday before the All-Star Game, in order to ease travel time for those who are participating in the Home Run Derby. A single, nationally televised afternoon game will be played the following Thursday, with all other teams returning to play on Friday.[3][4]

text: Time of first pitch[edit]

text: Start of Major League Baseball games depends on days of the week, game number in series, holidays, and other factors. Most games start at 7pm in the local time zone, so there are more night games than day games even though baseball is traditionally played during the day. The reason why there are more night baseball games is to attract more fans to ballparks as well as viewers from home because most fans would be at work or school during the day. On Mondays (excluding Opening Day and holidays), Tuesdays, and Fridays, games are almost exclusively played at night except for Cubs home games. Getaway days, days on which teams play their last game of the series before departing for another series in another city the next day, are usually day games, mainly Sundays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays. On Sundays, usually all but one are day games, with the final game reserved for ESPN's Sunday Night Baseball.

text: About half of Saturday games are day games (1, 2 or 4pm ET).  In some markets, Saturday night start an hour earlier than usual night start times, but other cities start Saturday night games at the same time as weeknight games. In conclusion, weekday games are only played at night except for getaway days while many weekend games are played during the day.

text: The initial pitch typically occurs 5 or 10 minutes after the hour, in order to allow time for pre-game ceremonies.


document_title: Paul the Apostle

question_text: where did paul in the bible come from

question_tokens: where did paul in the bible come from

text: Paul the Apostle

text: Available sources

text: The main source for information about Paul's life is the material found in his epistles and in Acts. However, the epistles contain little information about Paul's past. The book of Acts recounts more information but leaves several parts of Paul's life out of its narrative, such as his probable but undocumented execution in Rome.[18] Some scholars believe Acts also contradicts Paul's epistles on multiple accounts, in particular concerning the frequency of Paul's visits to the church in Jerusalem.[19]

text: Sources outside the New Testament that mention Paul include:

text:
Clement of Rome's epistle to the Corinthians (late 1st/early 2nd century);
Ignatius of Antioch's letter To the Romans (early 2nd century);
Polycarp's letter to the Philippians (early 2nd century);

text: Names

text: It has been popularly assumed that Saul's name was changed when he became a follower of Jesus Christ, but that is not the case.[5][20] His Jewish name was "Saul" (Hebrew: שָׁאוּל, Modern Sha'ul, Tiberian Šāʼûl, "asked for, prayed for, borrowed"), perhaps after the biblical King Saul, a fellow Benjamite and the first king of Israel. According to the Book of Acts, he inherited Roman citizenship from his father.[citation needed] As a Roman citizen, he also bore the Latin name of "Paul" – in biblical Greek: Παῦλος (Paulos),[21] and in Latin: Paulus.[22][Acts 16:37][22:25–28] It was quite usual for the Jews of that time to have two names, one Hebrew, the other Latin or Greek.[23][24][25]

text: Jesus called him "Saul, Saul"[26] in "the Hebrew tongue" in the book of Acts, when he had the vision which led to his conversion on the Road to Damascus.[27] Later, in a vision to Ananias of Damascus, "the Lord" referred to him as "Saul, of Tarsus".[6] When Ananias came to restore his sight, he called him "Brother Saul".[28]

text: In Acts 13:9, Saul is called "Paul" for the first time on the island of Cyprus–much later than the time of his conversion. The author (Luke) indicates that the names were interchangeable: "Saul, who also is called Paul." He thereafter refers to him as Paul, apparently Paul's preference since he is called Paul in all other Bible books where he is mentioned, including those that he authored. Adopting his Roman name was typical of Paul's missionary style. His method was to put people at their ease and to approach them with his message in a language and style to which they could relate, as in 1 Cor 9:19–23.[5]

text: Biblical narrative

text: Early life

text: The two main sources of information by which we have access to the earliest segments of Paul's career are the Bible's Book of Acts and the autobiographical elements of Paul's letters to the early church communities. Paul was likely born between the years of 5 BC and 5 AD.[29] The Book of Acts indicates that Paul was a Roman citizen by birth, more affirmatively describing his father as such,[citation needed] but Helmut Koester takes issue with the evidence presented by the text.[30][Acts 16:37][Acts 22:25–29]

text: He was from a devout Jewish family[31] in the city of Tarsus–one of the largest trade centers on the Mediterranean coast.[32] It had been in existence several hundred years prior to his birth. It was renowned for its university. During the time of Alexander the Great, who died in 323 BC, Tarsus was the most influential city in Asia Minor.[31]

text: Paul referred to himself as being "of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of the Hebrews; as touching the law, a Pharisee".[Phil. 3:5]

text: The Bible reveals very little about Paul's family. Paul's nephew, his sister's son, is mentioned in Acts 23:16. Acts also quotes Paul referring to his father by saying he, Paul, was "a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee" (Acts 23:6). In Romans 16:7 he states that his relatives, Andronicus and Junia, were Christians before he was and were prominent among the apostles.

text: The family had a history of religious piety (2 Timothy 1:3) [33] Apparently the family lineage had been very attached to Pharisaic traditions and observances for generations.[Philippians 3:5–6] Acts says that he was in the tent-making profession.[Acts 18:1–3] This was to become an initial connection with Priscilla and Aquila with whom he would partner in tentmaking[Acts 18:3] and later become very important teammates as fellow missionaries.[Rom. 16:4]

text: While he was still fairly young, he was sent to Jerusalem to receive his education at the school of Gamaliel,[Acts 22:3] one of the most noted rabbis in history. The Hillel school was noted for giving its students a balanced education, likely giving Paul broad exposure to classical literature, philosophy, and ethics.[34] Some of his family may have resided in Jerusalem since later the son of one of his sisters saved his life there.[Acts 23:16] Nothing more is known of his background until he takes an active part in the martyrdom of Stephen.[Acts 7:58–60; 22:20] Paul confesses that "beyond measure" he persecuted the church of God prior to his conversion.[Gal. 1:13–14] [Phil. 3:6] [Acts 8:1–3] Although we know from his biography and from Acts that Paul could speak Hebrew, modern scholarship suggests that Koine Greek was his first language.[35][36]

text: In his letters, Paul drew heavily on his knowledge of Stoic philosophy, using Stoic terms and metaphors to assist his new Gentile converts in their understanding of the revealed word of God.[37]

text: He also owed much to his training in the law and the prophets, utilizing this knowledge to convince his Jewish countrymen of the unity of past Old Testament prophecy and covenants with the fulfilling of these in Jesus Christ. His wide spectrum of experiences and education gave the "Apostle to the Gentiles"[Rom. 1:5] [11:13] [Gal. 2:8] the tools which he later would use to effectively spread the Gospel and to establish the church in the Roman Empire.[34]

text: Conversion

text: Paul's conversion can be dated to 31–36[38][39][40] by his reference to it in one of his letters. In Galatians 1:16 Paul writes that God "was pleased to reveal his son to me." In 1 Corinthians 15:8, as he lists the order in which Jesus appeared to his disciples after his resurrection, Paul writes, "last of all, as to one untimely born, He appeared to me also."

text: According to the account in Acts, it took place on the road to Damascus, where he reported having experienced a vision of the resurrected Jesus. The account says that "he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?" Saul replied, "Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: [it is] hard for thee to kick against the pricks (goads)."[Acts 9:4–5]

text: According to the account in Acts 9:1–22, he was blinded for three days and had to be led into Damascus by the hand. During these three days, Saul took no food or water and spent his time in prayer to God. When Ananias of Damascus arrived, he laid his hands on him and said: "Brother Saul, the Lord, [even] Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost."[Acts 9:17] His sight was restored, he got up and was baptized.[Acts 9:18] This story occurs only in Acts, not in the Pauline epistles.[41]

text: The author of Acts of the Apostles may have learned of Paul's conversion from the church in Jerusalem, or from the church in Antioch, or possibly from Paul himself.[42]

text: Post-conversion

text: And immediately he proclaimed Jesus in the synagogues, saying, “He is the Son of God.” And all who heard him were amazed and said, “Is not this the man who made havoc in Jerusalem of those who called upon this name? And has he not come here for this purpose, to bring them bound before the chief priests?” But Saul increased all the more in strength, and confounded the Jews who lived in Damascus by proving that Jesus was the Christ.

text: In the opening verses of Romans 1, Paul provides a litany of his own apostolic appointment to preach among the Gentiles[Gal. 1:16] and his post-conversion convictions about the risen Christ.[8]

text:
Paul described himself as

a servant of Jesus Christ;
having experienced an unforeseen, sudden, startling change, due to all-powerful grace – not the fruit of his reasoning or thoughts;[Gal. 1:12–15] [1 Cor. 15:10]
having seen Christ as did the other apostles when Christ appeared to him[1 Cor. 15:8] as he appeared to Peter, to James, to the Twelve, after his Resurrection;[1 Cor. 9:1]
called to be an apostle;
set apart for the gospel of God.

Paul described Jesus as

having been promised by God beforehand through his prophets in the holy Scriptures;
being the true messiah and the Son of God;
having biological lineage from David ("according to the flesh");[Rom. 1:3]
having been declared to be the Son of God in power according to the Spirit of holiness by his resurrection from the dead;
being Jesus Christ our Lord;
the One through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the obedience of faith for the sake of his name among all the nations, "including you who are called to belong to Jesus Christ".

Jesus

lives in heaven;
is God's Son;
would soon return.[8]

The Cross

he now believed Jesus' death was a voluntary sacrifice that reconciled sinners with God.[Rom. 5:6–10] [Phil. 2:8]

The Law

he now believed the law only reveals the extent of people's enslavement to the power of sin – a power that must be broken by Christ.[Rom. 3:20b] [7:7–12]

Gentiles

he had believed Gentiles were outside the covenant that God made with Israel;
he now believed Gentiles and Jews were united as the people of God in Christ Jesus.[Gal. 3:28]

Circumcision

had believed circumcision was the rite through which males became part of Israel, an exclusive community of God's chosen people;[Phil. 3:3–5]
he now believed that neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, but that the new creation is what counts in the sight of God,[Gal. 6:15] and that this new creation is a work of Christ in the life of believers, making them part of the church, an inclusive community of Jews and Gentiles reconciled with God through faith.[Rom. 6:4]

Persecution

had believed his violent persecution of the church to be an indication of his zeal for his religion;[Phil. 3:6]
he now believed Jewish hostility toward the church was sinful opposition that would incur God's wrath;[1 Thess. 2:14–16] [7]:236 he believed he was halted by Christ when his fury was at its height;[Acts 9:1–2] It was "through zeal" that he persecuted the Church,[Philippians 3:6] and he obtained mercy because he had "acted ignorantly in unbelief".[1 Tim. 1:13][33]

The Last Days

had believed God's messiah would put an end to the old age of evil and initiate a new age of righteousness;
he now believed this would happen in stages that had begun with the resurrection of Jesus, but the old age would continue until Jesus returns.[Rom. 16:25] [1 Cor. 10:11] [Gal. 1:4] [7]:236

text: Paul is critical both theologically and empirically of claims of moral or lineal superiority [Rom. 2:16–26] of Jews while conversely strongly sustaining the notion of a special place for the Children of Israel.[9-11]

text: There are debates as to whether Paul understood himself as commissioned to take the gospel to the Gentiles at the moment of his conversion.[43]

text: Early ministry

text: After his conversion, Paul went to Damascus, where Acts 9 states he was healed of his blindness and baptized by Ananias of Damascus.[44] Paul says that it was in Damascus that he barely escaped death.[2 Cor. 11:32] Paul also says that he then went first to Arabia, and then came back to Damascus.[Gal. 1:17][45] Paul's trip to Arabia is not mentioned anywhere else in the Bible, and some suppose he actually traveled to Mount Sinai for meditations in the desert.[46][47] He describes in Galatians how three years after his conversion he went to Jerusalem. There he met James and stayed with Simon Peter for 15 days.[Gal. 1:13–24] Paul located Mount Sinai in Arabia in Galatians 4:24–25.

text: Paul asserted that he received the Gospel not from man, but directly by "the revelation of Jesus Christ".[Gal 1:11–16] He claimed almost total independence from the Jerusalem community[3]:316–20 (possibly in the Cenacle), but agreed with it on the nature and content of the gospel.[Gal 1:22–24] He appeared eager to bring material support to Jerusalem from the various growing Gentile churches that he started. In his writings, Paul used the persecutions he endured to avow proximity and union with Jesus and as a validation of his teaching.

text: Paul's narrative in Galatians states that 14 years after his conversion he went again to Jerusalem.[Gal. 2:1–10] It is not known what happened during this time, but both Acts and Galatians provide some details.[48] At the end of this time, Barnabas went to find Paul and brought him back to Antioch. [Acts 11:26]

text: When a famine occurred in Judea, around 45–46,[49] Paul and Barnabas journeyed to Jerusalem to deliver financial support from the Antioch community.[50] According to Acts, Antioch had become an alternative center for Christians following the dispersion of the believers after the death of Stephen. It was in Antioch that the followers of Jesus were first called "Christians".[Acts 11:26]

text: First missionary journey

text: The author of Acts arranges Paul's travels into three separate journeys. The first journey,[Acts 13–14] led initially by Barnabas,[51] took Paul from Antioch to Cyprus then into southern Asia Minor (Anatolia), and finally returning to Antioch. In Cyprus, Paul rebukes and blinds Elymas the magician[Acts 13:8–12] who was criticizing their teachings. From this point on, Paul is described as the leader of the group.[citation needed]

text: They sail to Perga in Pamphylia. John Mark leaves them and returns to Jerusalem. Paul and Barnabas go on to Pisidian Antioch. On Sabbath they go to the synagogue. The leaders invite them to speak. Paul reviews Israelite history from life in Egypt to King David. He introduces Jesus as a descendant of David brought to Israel by God. He said that his team came to town to bring the message of salvation. He recounts the story of Jesus' death and resurrection. He quotes from the Septuagint[52] to assert that Jesus was the promised Christos who brought them forgiveness for their sins. Both the Jews and the "God-fearing" Gentiles invited them to talk more next Sabbath. At that time almost the whole city gathered. This upset some influential Jews who spoke against them. Paul used the occasion to announce a change in his mission which from then on would be to the Gentiles.[Acts 13:13–48]

text: Interval at Antioch

text: Antioch served as a major Christian center for Paul's evangelism,[3] and he remained there for "a long time with the disciples"[53] at the conclusion of his first journey. The exact duration of Paul's stay in Antioch is unknown, with estimates ranging from nine months to as long as eight years.[54]

text: Council of Jerusalem

text: A vital meeting between Paul and the Jerusalem church took place some time in the years 50–51,[55] described in Acts 15:2 and usually seen as the same event mentioned by Paul in Galatians 2:1.[18] The key question raised was whether Gentile converts needed to be circumcised.[55][56] At this meeting, Paul states in his letter to the Galatians that Peter, James, and John accepted Paul's mission to the Gentiles.

text: The Jerusalem meetings are mentioned in Acts, and also in Paul's letters.[57] For example, the Jerusalem visit for famine relief[Acts 11:27–30] apparently corresponds to the "first visit" (to Peter and James only).[Gal. 1:18–20][57] F. F. Bruce suggested that the "fourteen years" could be from Paul's conversion rather than from his first visit to Jerusalem.[58]

text: Incident at Antioch

text: Despite the agreement achieved at the Council of Jerusalem, Paul recounts how he later publicly confronted Peter in a dispute sometimes called the "Incident at Antioch", over Peter's reluctance to share a meal with Gentile Christians in Antioch because they did not strictly adhere to Jewish customs.[55]

text: Writing later of the incident, Paul recounts, "I opposed [Peter] to his face, because he was clearly in the wrong", and says he told Peter, "You are a Jew, yet you live like a Gentile and not like a Jew. How is it, then, that you force Gentiles to follow Jewish customs?"[Gal. 2:11–14] Paul also mentions that even Barnabas, his traveling companion and fellow apostle until that time, sided with Peter.[55]

text: The final outcome of the incident remains uncertain. The Catholic Encyclopedia suggests that Paul won the argument, because "Paul's account of the incident leaves no doubt that Peter saw the justice of the rebuke".[55] However Paul himself never mentions a victory and L. Michael White's From Jesus to Christianity draws the opposite conclusion: "The blowup with Peter was a total failure of political bravado, and Paul soon left Antioch as persona non grata, never again to return".[59]

text: The primary source account of the Incident at Antioch is Paul's letter to the Galatians.[Gal. 2:11–14]

text: Second missionary journey

text: Paul left for his second missionary journey from Jerusalem, in late Autumn 49,[62] after the meeting of the Council of Jerusalem where the circumcision question was debated. On their trip around the Mediterranean sea, Paul and his companion Barnabas stopped in Antioch where they had a sharp argument about taking John Mark with them on their trips. The book of Acts said that John Mark had left them in a previous trip and gone home. Unable to resolve the dispute, Paul and Barnabas decided to separate; Barnabas took John Mark with him, while Silas joined Paul.

text: Paul and Silas initially visited Tarsus (Paul's birthplace), Derbe and Lystra. In Lystra, they met Timothy, a disciple who was spoken well of, and decided to take him with them. The Church kept growing, adding believers, and strengthening in faith daily.[Acts 16:5]

text: In Philippi, Paul cast a spirit of divination out of a servant girl, whose masters were then unhappy about the loss of income her soothsaying provided (Acts 16:16–24). They turned the city against the missionaries, and Paul and Silas were put in jail. After a miraculous earthquake, the gates of the prison fell apart and Paul and Silas could have escaped but remained; this event led to the conversion of the jailor (Acts 16:25–40). They continued traveling, going by Berea and then to Athens, where Paul preached to the Jews and God-fearing Greeks in the synagogue and to the Greek intellectuals in the Areopagus. Paul continued from Athens to Corinth.

text: Interval in Corinth

text: Around 50–52, Paul spent 18 months in Corinth. The reference in Acts to Proconsul Gallio helps ascertain this date (cf. Gallio Inscription).[18] In Corinth, Paul met Priscilla and Aquila (Acts 18:2), who became faithful believers and helped Paul through his other missionary journeys. The couple followed Paul and his companions to Ephesus, and stayed there to start one of the strongest and most faithful churches at that time (Acts 18:18–21).

text: In 52, departing from Corinth, Paul stopped at the nearby village of Cenchreae to have his hair cut off, because of a vow he had earlier taken.[63] It is possible this was to be a final haircut prior to fulfilling his vow to become a Nazirite for a defined period of time.[64] With Priscilla and Aquila, the missionaries then sailed to Ephesus[65] and then Paul alone went on to Caesarea to greet the Church there. He then traveled north to Antioch, where he stayed for some time (Greek: ποιησας χρονον, perhaps about a year), before leaving again on a third missionary journey.[citation needed] Some New Testament texts[66] suggest that he also visited Jerusalem during this period for one of the Jewish feasts, possibly Pentecost.[67] Textual critic Henry Alford and others consider the reference to a Jerusalem visit to be genuine[68] and it accords with Acts 21:29, according to which Paul and Trophimus the Ephesian had previously been seen in Jerusalem.

text: Third missionary journey

text: According to Acts, Paul began his third missionary journey by travelling all around the region of Galatia and Phrygia to strengthen, teach and rebuke the believers. Paul then traveled to Ephesus, an important center of early Christianity, and stayed there for almost three years, probably working there as a tentmaker,[69] as he had done when he stayed in Corinth. He is claimed to have performed numerous miracles, healing people and casting out demons, and he apparently organized missionary activity in other regions.[18] Paul left Ephesus after an attack from a local silversmith resulted in a pro-Artemis riot involving most of the city.[18] During his stay in Ephesus, Paul wrote four letters to the church in Corinth.[70]

text: Paul went through Macedonia into Achaea (Acts 20:1–2) and stayed in Greece, probably Corinth, for three months (Acts 20:1–2) during 56–57 AD.[18] Commentators generally agree that Paul dictated his Epistle to the Romans during this period.[71] He then made ready to continue on to Syria, but he changed his plans and traveled back through Macedonia because of some Jews who had made a plot against him. In Romans 15:19 Paul wrote that he visited Illyricum, but he may have meant what would now be called Illyria Graeca,[72] which was at that time a division of the Roman province of Macedonia.[73] On their way back to Jerusalem, Paul and his companions visited other cities such as Philippi, Troas, Miletus, Rhodes, and Tyre. Paul finished his trip with a stop in Caesarea, where he and his companions stayed with Philip the Evangelist before finally arriving at Jerusalem.[Acts 21:8–10] [21:15]

text: Journey from Rome to Spain

text: Among the writings of the early Christians, Pope Clement I said that Paul was "Herald (of the Gospel of Christ) in the West", and that "he had gone to the extremity of the west".[74] John Chrysostom indicated that Paul preached in Spain: "For after he had been in Rome, he returned to Spain, but whether he came thence again into these parts, we know not".[75] Cyril of Jerusalem said that Paul, "fully preached the Gospel, and instructed even imperial Rome, and carried the earnestness of his preaching as far as Spain, undergoing conflicts innumerable, and performing Signs and wonders".[76] The Muratorian fragment mentions "the departure of Paul from the city [of Rome] [5a] (39) when he journeyed to Spain".[77]

text: Visits to Jerusalem in Acts and the epistles

text: This table is adapted from White, From Jesus to Christianity.[57] Note that the matching of Paul's travels in the Acts and the travels in his Epistles is done for the reader's convenience and is not approved of by all scholars.

text:
Acts
Epistles

First visit to Jerusalem[Acts 9:26–27]

"after many days" of Damascus conversion
preaches openly in Jerusalem with Barnabas
meets apostles

First visit to Jerusalem[Gal. 1:18–20]

three years after Damascus conversion[Gal. 1:17–18]
sees only Cephas (Peter) and James

Second visit to Jerusalem[Acts 11:29–30] [12:25]

for famine relief

There is debate over whether Paul's visit in Galatians 2 refers to the visit for famine relief[Acts 11:30, 12:25] or the Jerusalem Council.[Acts 15] If it refers to the former, then this was the trip made "after an interval of fourteen years".[Gal. 2:1]

Third visit to Jerusalem[Acts 15:1–19]

with Barnabas
"Council of Jerusalem"
followed by confrontation with Barnabas in Antioch[Acts 15:36–40]

Another[78] visit to Jerusalem[Gal. 2:1–10]

14 years later (after Damascus conversion?)
with Barnabas and Titus
possibly the "Council of Jerusalem"
Paul agrees to "remember the poor"
followed by confrontation with Peter and Barnabas in Antioch[Gal. 2:11–14]

Fourth visit to Jerusalem[Acts 18:21–22]

to "greet the church"

Apparently unmentioned.

Fifth visit to Jerusalem[Acts 21:17ff]

after an absence of several years[Acts 24:17]
to bring gifts for the poor and to present offerings
Paul arrested

Another[79] visit to Jerusalem[80]

to deliver the collection for the poor

text: Last visit to Jerusalem and arrest

text: In 57, upon completion of his third missionary journey, Paul arrived in Jerusalem for his fifth and final visit with a collection of money for the local community. Acts reports that he initially was warmly received. However, Acts goes on to recount how Paul was warned by James and the elders that he was gaining a reputation for being against the Law, saying "they have been told about you that you teach all the Jews who are among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, telling them not to circumcise their children or walk according to our customs". Paul underwent a purification ritual in order to give the Jews no grounds to bring accusations against him for not following their law.[Acts 21:17–26]

text: After seven days in Jerusalem, some "Jews from Asia" (most likely from Roman Asia) accused Paul of defiling the temple by bringing gentiles into it. He was seized and dragged out of the temple by an angry mob. He narrowly escaped being killed by surrendering to a group of Roman centurions, who arrested him, put him in chains and took him to the tribune.[Acts 21:27–36]

text: When a plot to kill Paul on his way to an appearance before the Jews was discovered, he was transported by night to Caesarea Maritima. He was held as a prisoner there for two years, until a new governor reopened his case in 59. When the governor suggested that he be sent back to Jerusalem for further trial, Paul exercised his right as a Roman citizen to "appeal unto Caesar".[18] Finally, Paul and his companions sailed for Rome where Paul was to stand trial for his alleged crimes.[81]

text: Acts recounts that on the way to Rome for his appeal as a Roman citizen to Caesar, Paul was shipwrecked on "Melita" (Malta),[Acts 27:39–44] where the islanders showed him "unusual kindness" and where he was met by Publius.[Acts 28:1–10] From Malta, he travelled to Rome via Syracuse, Rhegium and Puteoli.[Acts 28:11–14]

text: Two years in Rome

text: He finally arrived in Rome around 60, where he spent another two years under house arrest.[81] The narrative of Acts ends with Paul preaching in Rome for two years from his rented home while awaiting trial.[Acts 28:30–31]

text: Irenaeus wrote in the 2nd century that Peter and Paul had been the founders of the church in Rome and had appointed Linus as succeeding bishop.[82] Paul was not a bishop of Rome, nor did he bring Christianity to Rome since there were already Christians in Rome when he arrived there.[Acts 28:14–15] Also, Paul wrote his letter to the church at Rome before he had visited Rome.[Romans 1:1,7,11–13;15:23–29] Paul only played a supporting part in the life of the church in Rome.[83]

text: Death

text: The New Testament does not say when or how Paul died. The date of Paul's death is believed to have occurred after the Great Fire of Rome in July 64, but before the last year of Nero's reign, in 68.

text: Paul's death is described in a number of sources:

text:
I Clement (95–96 AD) suggests that both Paul and Peter were martyred.[84]
There is an early tradition found in the writing of Ignatius, probably around 110 AD, that Paul was martyred.[85]
Dionysius of Corinth, in a letter to the Romans (166–174 AD), stated that Paul and Peter were martyred in Italy.[86] Eusebius also cites the Dionysius passage.[87]
The Acts of Paul, an apocryphal work written around 160, describes the martyrdom of Paul. According to the Acts of Paul, Nero condemned Paul to death by decapitation.[88]
Tertullian in his Prescription Against Heretics (200 AD) writes that Paul had a similar death to that of John the Baptist, who was beheaded.[89]
Eusebius of Caesarea in his Church History (320 AD) testifies that Paul was beheaded in Rome and Peter crucified. He wrote that the tombs of these two apostles, with their inscriptions, were extant in his time; and quotes as his authority a holy man of the name of Caius.[90]
Lactantius wrote that Nero "crucified Peter, and slew Paul" (318 AD).[91]
Jerome in his De Viris Illustribus (On Illustrious Men) (392 AD) states that Paul was beheaded at Rome.[92]
John Chrysostom (c. 349–407) wrote that Nero knew Paul personally and had him killed.[93]
Sulpicius Severus says Nero killed Peter and Paul. (403 AD)[94]

text: A legend later[when?] developed that his martyrdom occurred at the Aquae Salviae, on the Via Laurentina. According to this legend, after Paul was decapitated, his severed head rebounded three times, giving rise to a source of water each time that it touched the ground, which is how the place earned the name "San Paolo alle Tre Fontane" ("St Paul at the Three Fountains").[95][96] Also according to legend, Paul's body was buried outside the walls of Rome, at the second mile on the Via Ostiensis, on the estate owned by a Christian woman named Lucina. It was here, in the fourth century, that the Emperor Constantine the Great built a first church. Then, between the fourth and fifth centuries it was considerably enlarged by the Emperors Valentinian I, Valentinian II, Theodosius I, and Arcadius. The present-day Basilica of Saint Paul Outside the Walls was built there in 1800.[95]

text: Remains

text: Caius in his Disputation Against Proclus (198 AD) mentions this of the places in which the remains of the apostles Peter and Paul were deposited: "I can point out the trophies of the apostles. For if you are willing to go to the Vatican or to the Ostian Way, you will find the trophies of those who founded this Church".[97]

text: Jerome in his De Viris Illustribus (392 AD) writing on Paul's biography, mentions that "Paul was buried in the Ostian Way at Rome".[92]

text: In 2002, an 8 foot long marble sarcophagus, inscribed with the words "PAULO APOSTOLO MART" ("Paul apostle martyr") was discovered during excavations around the Basilica of Saint Paul Outside the Walls on the Via Ostiensis. Vatican archaeologists declared this to be the tomb of Paul the Apostle in 2005.[98] In June 2009, Pope Benedict XVI announced excavation results concerning the tomb. The sarcophagus was not opened but was examined by means of a probe, which revealed pieces of incense, purple and blue linen, and small bone fragments. The bone was radiocarbon-dated to the 1st or 2nd century. According to the Vatican, these findings support the conclusion that the tomb is Paul's.[99][100]

text: Writings

text:
Part of a series of articles on

Paul in the Bible

[show]
Pauline literature

Romans

I Corinthians
II Corinthians

Galatians
Ephesians

Philippians
Colossians

I Thessalonians
II Thessalonians

Pastoral epistles

I Timothy
II Timothy
Titus

Philemon
Hebrews

[show]
Authorship

Paul the Apostle

[show]
Related literature

Lost epistles
Apocalypse of Paul

Coptic Apocalypse of Paul

Corinthians to Paul
Acts of Paul

Paul and Thecla
Peter and Paul

Prayer of Paul

[show]
See also

Apostle (Christian)
Pauline Christianity

v
t
e

text:
Part of a series on

Catholic philosophy

Aquinas, Scotus, and Ockham

Schools

Augustinianism
Molinism
Occamism
Salamanca
Scholasticism

Neo-scholasticism

Scotism
Thomism

Ethics

Natural law
Personalism
Social teaching
Virtue ethics

Ancient philosophers

Ambrose
Augustine of Hippo
Jerome
Paul the Apostle

Medieval philosophers

Peter Abelard
Alexander of Hales
Thomas Aquinas
Benedict of Nursia
Francis of Mayrone
Giles of Rome
Pope Gregory I
Henry of Ghent
Peter Lombard
Albertus Magnus
Duns Scotus
William of Ockham

Renaissance philosophers

Erasmus
Luis de Molina
Thomas More
Francisco de Vitoria

Modern philosophers

G. E. M. Anscombe
Pope John Paul II
Bernard Lonergan
Alasdair MacIntyre
Jacques Maritain
Blaise Pascal
Edith Stein
Charles Taylor

 Catholicism portal
 Philosophy portal

v
t
e

text: Of the 27 books in the New Testament, 14 have been attributed to Paul; 7 of these are widely considered authentic and Paul's own, while the authorship of the other 7 is disputed.[101][102][103] The undisputed letters are considered the most important sources since they contain what everyone agrees to be Paul's own statements about his life and thoughts. Theologian Mark Powell writes that Paul directed these 7 letters to specific occasions at particular churches. As an example, if the Corinthian church had not experienced problems concerning its celebration of the Lord's Supper,[1 Cor. 11:17–34] today we would not know that Paul even believed in that observance or had any opinions about it one way or the other. He asks if we might be ignorant of other matters simply because no crises arose that prompted Paul to comment on them.[7]:234

text: Although approximately half of Acts deals with Paul's life and works, the Book of Acts does not refer to Paul writing letters. Historians believe that the author of Acts did not have access to any of Paul's letters. One piece of evidence suggesting this is that Acts never directly quotes from the Pauline epistles. Discrepancies between the Pauline epistles and Acts would further support the conclusion that the author of Acts did not have access to those epistles when composing Acts.[104][105]

text: In Paul's writings, he provides the first written account of what it is to be a Christian and thus a description of Christian spirituality. His letters have been characterized as being the most influential books of the New Testament after the Gospels of Matthew and John.[8]

text: Paul ... only occasionally had the opportunity to revisit his churches. He tried to keep up his converts' spirit, answer their questions, and resolve their problems by letter and by sending one or more of his assistants (especially Timothy and Titus).

text: Paul's letters reveal a remarkable human being: dedicated, compassionate, emotional, sometimes harsh and angry, clever and quick-witted, supple in argumentation, and above all possessing a soaring, passionate commitment to God, Jesus Christ, and his own mission. Fortunately, after his death one of his followers collected some of the letters, edited them very slightly, and published them. They constitute one of history's most remarkable personal contributions to religious thought and practice.[8]

text: Basic message

text: Paul's writings emphasized the crucifixion, Christ's resurrection and the Parousia or second coming of Christ.[106] E. P. Sanders finds three major emphases in Paul's writings:[8]

text:
His strongest emphasis was on the death, resurrection, and lordship of Jesus Christ. He preached that one's faith in Jesus assures that person a share in Jesus' life (salvation). He saw Jesus' death as being for the believers' benefit, not a defeat. Jesus died so that believers' sins would be forgiven.
The resurrection of Jesus was of primary importance to Paul, as may be seen in his first letter to the Thessalonians,[1 Thes. 1:9–10] which is the earliest surviving account of conversion to Christianity.[8]
The resurrection brought the promise of salvation to believers. Paul taught that, when Christ returned, those who had died believing in Christ as the saviour of mankind would be brought back to life, while those still alive would be "caught up in the clouds together with them to meet the Lord in the air".[1 Thes. 4:14–18]

text: Sanders concludes that Paul's writings reveal what he calls the essence of the Christian message:

text:
God sent his Son.
The Son was crucified for the sins of humanity.
After being dead three days, the Son was raised from the dead, defeating death.
The Son would soon return.
Those in Christ will live with him forever.
Followers are urged to live by a set apart (sanctified) standard – "And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ".[1 Thes. 5:23]

tag: ol

text: Authorship

text: Seven of the 13 letters that bear Paul's name – Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philippians, 1 Thessalonians and Philemon – were until recently almost universally accepted as being entirely authentic (dictated by Paul himself).[8][101][102][103] They are considered the best source of information on Paul's life and especially his thought.[8]

text: Four of the letters (Ephesians, 1 and 2 Timothy and Titus) are widely considered pseudepigraphical, while the authorship of the other two is subject to debate.[101] Colossians and 2 Thessalonians are thought by some to be "Deutero-Pauline" meaning they may have been written by Paul's followers after his death. Similarly, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, and Titus may be "Trito-Pauline" meaning they may have been written by members of the Pauline school a generation after his death. According to their theories, these disputed letters may have come from followers writing in Paul's name, often using material from his surviving letters. These scribes also may have had access to letters written by Paul that no longer survive.[8]

text: The authenticity of Colossians has been questioned on the grounds that it contains an otherwise unparalleled description (among his writings) of Jesus as "the image of the invisible God", a Christology found elsewhere only in John's gospel.[107] However, the personal notes in the letter connect it to Philemon, unquestionably the work of Paul. Internal evidence shows close connection with Philippians.[108]

text: Ephesians is a letter that is very similar to Colossians, but is almost entirely lacking in personal reminiscences. Its style is unique. It lacks the emphasis on the cross to be found in other Pauline writings, reference to the Second Coming is missing, and Christian marriage is exalted in a way which contrasts with the reference in 1 Cor. 7:8–9. Finally, according to R.E. Brown, it exalts the Church in a way suggestive of a second generation of Christians, "built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets" now past.[109]

text: The defenders of its Pauline authorship argue that it was intended to be read by a number of different churches and that it marks the final stage of the development of Paul's thinking. It has been said, too, that the moral portion of the Epistle, consisting of the last two chapters, has the closest affinity with similar portions of other Epistles, while the whole admirably fits in with the known details of Paul's life, and throws considerable light upon them.[108]

text: Three main reasons have been advanced by those who question Paul's authorship of 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, and Titus – also known as the Pastoral Epistles.

text:
First, they have found a difference in these letters' vocabulary, style, and theology from Paul's acknowledged writings. Defenders of the authenticity say that they were probably written in the name and with the authority of the Apostle by one of his companions, to whom he distinctly explained what had to be written, or to whom he gave a written summary of the points to be developed, and that when the letters were finished, Paul read them through, approved them, and signed them.[108]
Second, some believe there is a difficulty in fitting them into Paul's biography as we have it.[110] They, like Colossians and Ephesians, were written from prison but suppose Paul's release and travel thereafter.[108]
Third, 2 Thessalonians, like Colossians, is questioned by some on stylistic grounds, with some noting, among other peculiarities, a dependence on 1 Thessalonians – yet a distinctiveness in language from the Pauline corpus. This, again, is explainable by the possibility that Paul requested one of his companions to write the letter for him under his dictation.[108]

text: Atonement

text: Paul wrote down much of the theology of atonement.[111] Paul taught that Christians are redeemed from sin by Jesus' death and resurrection. His death was an expiation as well as a propitiation, and by Christ's blood peace is made between God and man.[111] By grace, through faith,[112] a Christian shares in Jesus' death and in his victory over death, gaining as a free gift a new, justified status of sonship.[113]

text: Relationship with Judaism

text: Some scholars see Paul (or Saul) as completely in line with 1st-century Judaism (a Pharisee and student of Gamaliel as presented by Acts),[114] others see him as opposed to 1st-century Judaism (see Marcionism), while the majority see him as somewhere in between these two extremes, opposed to "Ritual Laws" (for example the circumcision controversy in early Christianity) but in full agreement on "Divine Law". These views of Paul are paralleled by the views of Biblical law in Christianity.

text:
‘‘Paul redefined the people of Israel, those he calls the "true Israel" and the "true circumcision" as those who had faith in the heavenly Christ, thus excluding those he called "Israel after the flesh" from his new covenant (Galatians 6:16; Philippians 3:3). He also held the view that the Torah given to Moses was valid "until Christ came," so that even Jews are no longer "under the Torah," nor obligated to follow the commandments or mitzvot as given to Moses (Galatians 3-4).’’

— Professor James D. Tabor for the Huffington Post [115]

tag: div

text: Paul's theology of the gospel accelerated the separation of the messianic sect of Christians from Judaism, a development contrary to Paul's own intent. He wrote that faith in Christ was alone decisive in salvation for Jews and Gentiles alike, making the schism between the followers of Christ and mainstream Jews inevitable and permanent. He argued that Gentile converts did not need to become Jews, get circumcised, follow Jewish dietary restrictions, or otherwise observe Mosaic laws to be saved.[18] Nevertheless, in Romans he insisted on the positive value of the Law, as a moral guide.

text: E. P. Sanders' publications[116] have since been taken up by Professor James Dunn who coined the phrase "The New Perspective on Paul".[117] N.T. Wright,[118] the Anglican Bishop of Durham, notes a difference in emphasis between Galatians and Romans, the latter being much more positive about the continuing covenant between God and his ancient people than the former. Wright also contends that performing Christian works is not insignificant but rather proof of having attained the redemption of Jesus Christ by grace (free gift received by faith).[Rom. 2:13ff] He concludes that Paul distinguishes between performing Christian works which are signs of ethnic identity and others which are a sign of obedience to Christ.[118]

text: World to come

text: Paul believed that Jesus would return within his lifetime.[119] Paul expected that Christians who had died in the mean time would be resurrected to share in God's kingdom, and he believed that the saved would be transformed, assuming supernatural bodies.[citation needed]

text: Paul's teaching about the end of the world is expressed most clearly in his letters to the Christians at Thessalonica. He assures them that the dead will rise first and be followed by those left alive.[1 Thes. 4:16ff] This suggests an imminent end but he is unspecific about times and seasons, and encourages his hearers to expect a delay.[120] The form of the end will be a battle between Jesus and the man of lawlessness[2 Thess. 2:3][33] whose conclusion is the triumph of Christ.

text: Role of women

text: The second chapter of the first letter to Timothy – one of the six disputed letters – is used by many churches to deny women a vote in church affairs, reject women from serving as teachers of adult Bible classes, prevent them from serving as missionaries, and generally disenfranchise women from the duties and privileges of church leadership.[121]

text:
9 In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array;
10 But (which becometh women professing godliness) with good works.
11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve.
14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

text: The KJV translation of this passage taken literally says that women in the churches are to have no leadership roles vis-à-vis men.[122]

text: Fuller Seminary theologian J. R. Daniel Kirk[123] finds evidence in Paul's letters of a much more inclusive view of women. He writes that Romans 16 is a tremendously important witness to the important role of women in the early church. Paul praises Phoebe for her work as a deaconess and Junia who is described by Paul in Scripture as being respected among the Apostles.[Romans 16:7] It is Kirk's observation that recent studies have led many scholars to conclude that the passage in 1 Corinthians 14 ordering women to "be silent" during worship was a later addition, apparently by a different author, and not part of Paul's original letter to the Corinthians.

text: Other scholars, such as Giancarlo Biguzzi, believe that Paul's restriction on women speaking in 1 Corinthians 14 is genuine to Paul but applies to a particular case where there were local problems of women – who were not allowed in that culture to become educated – asking questions or chatting during worship services. He does not believe it to be a general prohibition on any woman speaking in worship settings since in 1 Corinthians Paul affirms the right (responsibility) of women to prophesy.[1 Cor. 11][124]

text: Biblical prophecy is more than "fore-telling": two-thirds of its inscripturated form involves "forth-telling", that is, setting the truth, justice, mercy, and righteousness of God against the backdrop of every form of denial of the same. Thus, to speak prophetically was to speak boldly against every form of moral, ethical, political, economic, and religious disenfranchisement observed in a culture that was intent on building its own pyramid of values vis-a-vis God's established system of truth and ethics.[125]

text: There were women prophets in the highly patriarchal times throughout the Old Testament.[125] The most common term for prophet in the Old Testament is nabi in the masculine form, and nebiah in the Hebrew feminine form, is used six times of women who performed the same task of receiving and proclaiming the message given by God. These women include Miriam, Aaron and Moses' sister,[Exod 15:20] Deborah,[Judges 4:4] the prophet Isaiah's wife,[Isa. 8:3] and Huldah, the one who interpreted the Book of the Law discovered in the temple during the days of Josiah.[2 Kings 22:14] [2 Chron. 34:22] There were false prophetesses just as there were false prophets. The prophetess Noadiah was among those who tried to intimidate Nehemiah.[Neh 6:14] Apparently they held equal rank in prophesying right along with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Elisha, Aaron, and Samuel.[125]

text: Kirk's third example of a more inclusive view is Galatians 3:28:

text: There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

text: In pronouncing an end within the church to the divisions which are common in the world around it, he concludes by highlighting the fact that "there were New Testament women who taught and had authority in the early churches, that this teaching and authority was sanctioned by Paul, and that Paul himself offers a theological paradigm within which overcoming the subjugation of women is an anticipated outcome".[126]

text: Classicist Evelyn Stagg and theologian Frank Stagg believe that Paul was attempting to "Christianize" the societal household or domestic codes that significantly oppressed women and empowered men as the head of the household. The Staggs present a serious study of what has been termed the New Testament domestic code, also known as the Haustafel.[127] The two main passages that explain these "household duties" are Paul's letters to the Ephesians 5:22 – 6:5 and to the Colossians 3:18–4:1. An underlying Household Code is also reflected in four additional Pauline letters and 1 Peter: 1 Timothy 2:1ff., 8ff.; 3:1ff., 8ff.; 5:17ff.; 6:1f.; Titus 2:1–10 and 1 Peter 2:13–3:9. Biblical scholars have typically treated the Haustafel in Ephesians as a resource in the debate over the role of women in ministry and in the home.[128]

text: Margaret MacDonald argues that the Haustafel, particularly as it appears in Ephesians, was aimed at "reducing the tension between community members and outsiders".[129]

text: E. P. Sanders has labeled the Apostle's remark in 1 Cor. 14:34–36 about women not making any sound during worship as "Paul's intemperate outburst that women should be silent in the churches".[116] Women, in fact, played a very significant part in Paul's missionary endeavors:

text:
He became a partner in ministry with the couple Priscilla and Aquila who are specifically named seven times in the New Testament – always by their couple name and never individually. Of the seven times they are named in the New Testament, Priscilla's name appears first in five of those instances, suggesting to some scholars that she was the head of the family unit.[130] They lived, worked, and traveled with the Apostle Paul, becoming his honored, much-loved friends and coworkers in Christ Jesus.[131] In Romans 16:3–4, thought to have been written in 56 or 57, Paul sends his greetings to Priscilla and Aquila and proclaims that both of them "risked their necks" to save Paul's life.
Chloe was an important member of the church in Corinth[1 Cor. 1:11]
Phoebe was a "deacon" and a "benefactor" of Paul and others[Rom. 16:1–2]
Romans 16 names eight other women active in the Christian movement, including Junia ("prominent among the apostles"), Mary ("who has worked very hard among you"), and Julia
Women were frequently among the major supporters of the new Christian movement[8]

text: Views on homosexuality

text: Most Christian traditions[132][133][134][135] say Paul clearly portrays homosexuality as sinful in two specific locations: Romans 1:26–27, and 1 Corinthians 6:9–10. Another passage addresses the topic more obliquely: 1 Timothy 1:8–11. Since the nineteenth century, however, most scholars have concluded that 1 Timothy, along with 2 Timothy and Titus, are not original to Paul, but rather an unknown Christian writing in Paul's name some time in the late-first-to-mid-2nd century.[136][137]

text: Influence on Christianity

text: Paul's influence on Christian thinking arguably has been more significant than any other New Testament author.[8] Paul declared that "Christ is the end of the law",[138] exalted the Christian church as the body of Christ, and depicted the world outside the Church as under judgment.[18] Paul's writings include the earliest reference to the "Lord's Supper",[139] a rite traditionally identified as the Christian communion or Eucharist. In the East, church fathers attributed the element of election in Romans 9 to divine foreknowledge.[18] The themes of predestination found in Western Christianity do not appear in Eastern theology. Augustine's foundational work on the gospel as a gift (grace), on morality as life in the Spirit, on predestination, and on original sin all derives from Paul, especially Romans.[18]

text: Modern theology

text: In his commentary The Epistle to the Romans (Ger. Der Römerbrief; particularly in the thoroughly re-written second edition of 1922) Karl Barth argued that the God who is revealed in the cross of Jesus challenges and overthrows any attempt to ally God with human cultures, achievements, or possessions. Some theologians believe this work to be the most important theological treatise since Friedrich Schleiermacher's On Religion: Speeches to its Cultured Despisers.[citation needed]

text: In addition to the many questions about the true origins of some of Paul's teachings posed by historical figures as noted above, some modern theologians also hold that the teachings of Paul differ markedly from those of Jesus as found in the Gospels.[140] Barrie Wilson states that Paul differs from Jesus in terms of the origin of his message, his teachings and his practices.[141] Some have even gone so far as to claim that, due to these apparent differences in teachings, that Paul was actually no less than the "second founder" of Christianity (Jesus being its first).[142][143]

text:
‘‘Visit any church service, Roman Catholic, Protestant or Greek Orthodox, and it is the apostle Paul and his ideas that are central – in the hymns, the creeds, the sermons, the invocation and benediction, and of course, the rituals of baptism and the Holy Communion or Mass. Whether birth, baptism, confirmation, marriage or death, it is predominantly Paul who is evoked to express meaning and significance.’’

— Professor James D. Tabor for the Huffington post [144]

text: Robert M. Price, in his book The Amazing Colossal Apostle: The Search for the Historical Paul, says "the Pauline epistles reveal themselves to the discerning reader to have exactly the same sort of limitation as the Gospels do: both are collections of fragments and pericopae contributed and fabricated by authors and communities of very different theological leanings".[145]

text: As in the Eastern tradition in general, Western humanists interpret the reference to election in Romans 9 as reflecting divine foreknowledge.[18]

text: Church tradition

text: Various Christian writers have suggested more details about Paul's life.

text: 1 Clement, a letter written by the Roman bishop Clement of Rome around the year 90, reports this about Paul:[146]

text: By reason of jealousy and strife Paul by his example pointed out the prize of patient endurance. After that he had been seven times in bonds, had been driven into exile, had been stoned, had preached in the East and in the West, he won the noble renown which was the reward of his faith, having taught righteousness unto the whole world and having reached the farthest bounds of the West; and when he had borne his testimony before the rulers, so he departed from the world and went unto the holy place, having been found a notable pattern of patient endurance.

text: Commenting on this passage, Raymond Brown writes that while it "does not explicitly say" that Paul was martyred in Rome, "such a martyrdom is the most reasonable interpretation".[147] Eusebius of Caesarea, who wrote in the 4th century, states that Paul was beheaded in the reign of the Roman Emperor Nero.[148] This event has been dated either to the year 64, when Rome was devastated by a fire, or a few years later, to 67. According to one tradition, the church of San Paolo alle Tre Fontane marks the place of Paul's execution. A Roman Catholic liturgical solemnity of Peter and Paul, celebrated on June 29, commemorates his martyrdom, and reflects a tradition (preserved by Eusebius) that Peter and Paul were martyred at the same time.[149] The Roman liturgical calendar for the following day now remembers all Christians martyred in these early persecutions; formerly, June 30 was the feast day for St. Paul.[150] Persons or religious orders with special affinity for St. Paul can still celebrate their patron on June 30.[151]

text: The apocryphal Acts of Paul and the apocryphal Acts of Peter suggest that Paul survived Rome and traveled further west. Some think that Paul could have revisited Greece and Asia Minor after his trip to Spain, and might then have been arrested in Troas, and taken to Rome and executed.[2 Tim. 4:13][33] A tradition holds that Paul was interred with Saint Peter ad Catacumbas by the via Appia until moved to what is now the Basilica of Saint Paul Outside the Walls in Rome. Bede, in his Ecclesiastical History, writes that Pope Vitalian in 665 gave Paul's relics (including a cross made from his prison chains) from the crypts of Lucina to King Oswy of Northumbria, northern Britain. Paul is considered the patron saint of London.

text: The Feast of the Conversion of Saint Paul is celebrated on January 25.[152]

text: Muslim views

text: Muslims have long believed that Paul purposefully corrupted the original revealed teachings of Jesus,[153][154][155] through the introduction of such elements as paganism,[156] the making of Christianity into a theology of the cross,[157] and introducing original sin and the need for redemption.[158]

text: Sayf ibn Umar claimed that certain rabbis persuaded Paul to deliberately misguide early Christians by introducing what Ibn Hazm viewed as objectionable doctrines into Christianity.[159][160] Ibn Hazm repeated Sayf's claims.[161] Rabbi Jacob Qirqisani also believed that Paul created Christianity by introducing the doctrine of Trinity.[159] Paul has been criticized by some modern Muslim thinkers. Syed Muhammad Naquib al-Attas wrote that Paul misrepresented the message of Jesus,[153] and Rashid Rida accused Paul of introducing shirk (polytheism) into Christianity.[162] Mohammad Ali Jouhar quoted Adolf von Harnack's critical writings of Paul.[163]

text: In Sunni Muslim polemics, Paul plays the same role (of deliberately corrupting the early teachings of Jesus) as a later Jew, Abdullah ibn Saba', would play in seeking to destroy the message of Islam from within (by introducing proto-Shi'ite beliefs).[164][165][160] Among those who supported this view were scholars Ibn Taymiyyah (who believed while Paul ultimately succeeded, Ibn Saba failed) and Ibn Hazm (who claimed that the Jews even admitted to Paul's sinister purpose).[166]

text: Jewish views

text: Jewish interest in Paul is a recent phenomenon. Before the positive historical reevaluations of Jesus by some Jewish thinkers in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, he had hardly featured in the popular Jewish imagination and little had been written about him by the religious leaders and scholars. Arguably, he is absent from the Talmud and rabbinical literature, although he makes an appearance in some variants of the medieval polemic Toledot Yeshu (as a spy for the rabbis).[167]

text: However, with Jesus no longer regarded as the paradigm of gentile Christianity, Paul's position became more important in Jewish historical reconstructions of their religion's relationship with Christianity. He has featured as the key to building barriers (e.g. Heinrich Graetz and Martin Buber) or bridges (e.g. Isaac Mayer Wise and Claude G. Montefiore) in interfaith relations,[168] as part of an intra-Jewish debate about what constitutes Jewish authenticity (e.g. Joseph Klausner and Hans Joachim Schoeps),[169] and on occasion as a dialogical partner (e.g. Richard L. Rubenstein and Daniel Boyarin).[170]

text: He features in an oratorio (by Felix Mendelssohn), a painting (by Ludwig Meidner) and a play (by Franz Werfel),[171] and there have been several novels about Paul (by Shalom Asch and Samuel Sandmel).[172] Jewish philosophers (including Baruch Spinoza, Leo Shestov, and Jacob Taubes)[173] and Jewish psychoanalysts (including Sigmund Freud and Hanns Sachs)[174] have engaged with the apostle as one of the most influential figures in Western thought. Scholarly surveys of Jewish interest in Paul include those by Hagner (1980),[175] Meissner (1996),[176] and Langton (2010, 2011).[177][178][179]

text: Literary analysis

text: Writing styles

text: British Jewish scholar Hyam Maccoby contended that the Paul as described in the book of Acts and the view of Paul gleaned from his own writings are very different people. Some difficulties have been noted in the account of his life. Paul as described in the Book of Acts is much more interested in factual history, less in theology; ideas such as justification by faith are absent as are references to the Spirit, according to Maccoby. He also pointed out that there are no references to John the Baptist in the Pauline Epistles, although Paul mentions him several times in the book of Acts.

text: Others have objected that the language of the speeches is too Lukan in style to reflect anyone else's words. Moreover, George Shillington writes that the author of Acts most likely created the speeches accordingly and they bear his literary and theological marks.[180] Conversely, Howard Marshall writes that the speeches were not entirely the inventions of the author and while they may not be accurate word-for-word, the author nevertheless records the general idea of them.[181]

text: F. C. Baur (1792–1860), professor of theology at Tübingen in Germany, the first scholar to critique Acts and the Pauline Epistles, and founder of the Tübingen School of theology, argued that Paul, as the "Apostle to the Gentiles", was in violent opposition to the original 12 Apostles. Baur considers the Acts of the Apostles were late and unreliable. This debate has continued ever since, with Adolf Deissmann (1866–1937) and Richard Reitzenstein (1861–1931) emphasising Paul's Greek inheritance and Albert Schweitzer stressing his dependence on Judaism.

text: Other views

text: In the second (and possibly) late first century, Gnosticism was a competing religious tradition to Christianity which shared some elements of theology.

text: Elaine Pagels, professor of religion at Princeton University and an authority on Gnosticism, declined to judge (in her book The Gnostic Paul) whether Paul was actually a Gnostic. Instead, she concentrated on how the Gnostics interpreted Paul's letters and how evidence from gnostic sources may challenge the assumption that Paul wrote his letters to combat "gnostic opponents" and to repudiate their statement that they possess secret wisdom.[182]

text: Professor Robert Eisenman of California State University, Long Beach argues that Paul was a member of the family of Herod the Great.[183] Eisenman makes a connection between Paul and an individual identified by Josephus as "Saulus", a "kinsman of Agrippa".[184] Another oft-cited element of the case for Paul as a member of Herod's family is found in Romans 16:11 where Paul writes, "Greet Herodion, my kinsman".

text: According to Timo Eskola, early Christian theology and discourse was influenced by the Jewish Merkabah tradition.[185] Similarly, Alan Segal and Daniel Boyarin regard Paul's accounts of his conversion experience and his ascent to the heavens as the earliest first person accounts we have of a Merkabah mystic in Jewish or Christian literature. Conversely, Timothy Churchill has argued that Paul's Damascus road encounter does not fit the pattern of Merkabah.[186]

text: Among the critics of Paul the Apostle was Thomas Jefferson, a Deist, who wrote that Paul was the "first corrupter of the doctrines of Jesus."[187] Christian anarchists, such as Leo Tolstoy[188] and Ammon Hennacy,[189] take a similar view.

text: F.F. Powell argues that Paul, in his epistles, made use of many of the ideas of the Greek philosopher Plato, sometimes even using the same metaphors and language.[190] For example, in Phaedrus, Plato has Socrates saying that the heavenly ideals are perceived as though "through a glass dimly",[191] Paul's language closely mirrors this phrase 1 Corinthians 13.

text: The latest research into the life of Paul disputes his claim of conversion. In 2015, independent researchers P.J. Gott and Logan Licht reported evidence they discovered[clarification needed] that suggests the books of the New Testament were written in "enigmatical modes of expression," the method Philo the Alexandrian Jew attributes to the Essene sect of Judaism.[192] Josephus the Jewish historian writes, "The Essenes also, as we call a sect of ours … live the same kind of life as do those whom the Greeks call Pythagoreans …"[193]

text: The Greek historian Plutarch ties "Pythagoreans" and "enigmatical modes of expression" together: "Pythagoras greatly admired the Egyptian priests, and, copying their symbolism and secret teachings, incorporated his doctrines in enigmas."[194] After testing Philo's "Essene" method as reconstructed by heresy-hunters in the 17th century, they conclude that Acts' "Paulus also known as Saulus" was the same "Saulus" Josephus blames for the events that led to the destruction of the Temple in 70.[195]

text: Physical appearance

text: The New Testament offers little if any information about the physical appearance of Paul, but several descriptions can be found in apocryphal texts. In the Acts of Paul[196] he is described as "A man of small stature, with a bald head and crooked legs, in a good state of body, with eyebrows meeting and nose somewhat hooked".[197] In the Latin version of the Acts of Paul and Thecla it is added that he had a red, florid face.[197]

text: In The History of the Contending of Saint Paul his countenance is actually described as "ruddy with the ruddiness of the skin of the pomegranate".[198] The Acts of Saint Peter confirms that Paul had a bald and shining head, with red hair.[199] As summarised by Barnes,[200] Chrysostom records that Paul's stature was low, his body crooked and his head bald. Lucian, in his Philopatris, describes Paul as "corpore erat parvo (he was small), contracto (contracted), incurvo (crooked), tricubitali (of three cubits, or four feet six)".[201]

text: Nicephorus claims that Paul was a little man, crooked, and almost bent like a bow, with a pale countenance, long and wrinkled, and a bald head. Pseudo-Chrysostom echoes Lucian's height of Paul, referring to him as "the man of three cubits".[201] Paul at one point compares himself as one who is like "a miscarried/aborted child".[202][not in citation given] This however probably does not suggest some kind of deformity such as being crooked or hunch-backed, that tormented him,[203] but rather his view of his worthiness to become an apostle.